As long as someone makes money off of it, you can get sued.
this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2025
233 points (98.7% liked)
Technology
75499 readers
3016 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I can't speak to Korean law, but this seems like a real stupid take. Actors are different from their characters. You can't damage a character because they aren't real.
In a lot of places you can be sued for defaming a company brand, though. This seems similar to that.
You can be sued for defamation regardless of the target, as long as you damaged their reputation with false statements. It's a lot easier to prove damages against a company than a regular person though.
This is in line with korean anti-harassment laws. Seems draconian to us but is entirely consistent with what koreans have been living with for over a decade now.
Besides the AI bubble I'm wanting to burst, I want this cringe-inducing obsession people have over KPop to burst someday too.
It has turned some people into being unhealthily rabid over this.
Let people like what they like. If it’s a fad, it’ll pass but until people are legitimately hurting themselves or others over it, just let people enjoy things they enjoy.
It feels really exploitive to me. I worry about anorexia and the psychological damage to those young performers. It's like the 90s in the US, you know?
The virtual stuff might be better tbh
What was unique about the 90s in the US?
No, but it was really bad back then
Every girl on online now does the choreographed k-pop arm moves when they dance like they are landing a plane.
They look stupid, this is just corpo music for Koreans no wonder the courts protected them.
Such trashy boyband slop how does it sell at all, do koreans have no taste at all or are they that brainwashed ?
The same way trashy boyband slop sells everywhere else: they have a different taste than you and judge music differently.
With boy bands like The Backstreet Boys or the Beatles, they don't go for some artsy music. All they need are songs that get stuck in your head and some pretty people singing them to get little girls/boys fawning over them.
And fun fact: their opinion is just as valid as yours. Because there is nothing as subjective as music.
In July 2024, the defendant targeted Plave in a series of posts - some containing profanity. Among them were comments that the people behind the avatars "could be ugly in real life" and gave off a "typical Korean man vibe", Korea Times reported.
Unless the guy said much worse things that weren't reported, it seems like South Korean defamation laws are draconian.
He's getting in the way of these people making money, so I can see useful idiots chomping at the bit to punish him.
So if they are voiced by AI or silent, we can defamate their picture as much as we want?
For now, for now.
plave touched me insppropriate when i was a child
Among them were comments that the people behind the avatars "could be ugly in real life" and gave off a "typical Korean man vibe", Korea Times reported.
I wish they'd reprint some of the actually "harmful" comments, because that kind of thing is just shitty online discourse. These examples are also pretty obviously targeted at the anons behind the group, not the avatars, but, again, it's no different from saying "I bet the person behind I Cast Fist is a fat and ugly man" - that's not defamation
But the court rejected the argument, saying that if an avatar was widely recognised to represent someone real, then attacks on the avatar also extended to the real person.
No, it does not. That's a terrible precedent to make. A character is not the person behind it, a character can live on without the original person behind it and can be interpreted by a different person.
I agree that the comments in question seem like nothing to count as defamation, but actual defamation of virtual bands should count as defamation IMO. They're as fictional as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorillaz is—every character is one-to-one to their real-life voice actors. Though I guess in that case you might be defaming the voice actor behind the character instead.
Anything that gets in the way of scumbags making money.
Darth Vader sucks egg salad through a hose to eat
Sounds like they represent real people is the reason
K-poop sounds like darth Vader sucking shit-salad through a garden hose
anyone know what the claim is to even count as defamation?. That to me seems like what should be the crux.
IE if the claim was "X's voice clearly shows he's dying of cancer." I could see that as defamation. On the other hand "X is summoning demons" that clearly would be fan-fiction.
I'm not sure about Korean laws specifically, but they're usually has to be actual damage to win a defamation case. If accusations of summoning demons caused them to lose business, it would count.